Re: MAPS: Re: V2: MDMA Memory Study, December 1998

[RickMAPS@xxxxxxx]

Per and Forum readers:

I am working on a response to the Neurology article but still have some
checking to do about the effect size.   Per's is correct that the finding of
p=0.06 , cited in the abstract reproduced below,  was not significant. 

"RESULTS: Greater use of MDMA (total milligrams per month) was associated with
greater impairment in immediate verbal memory (p < 0.02) and delayed visual
memory (p < 0.06). "

HOWEVER, the report of p<0.06 is an error in the abstract.  The text of the
paper and the table in the paper cite the accurate figure of p<0.02.    The
other p value given in the abstract for immediate verbal memory (p < 0.02) is
also in error. That figure should be p< 0.04.  Somehow, after all the peer
review, etc etc, these errors remained in the abstract.  Perhaps these errors
are errors of memory in that the authors and esteemed peer reviewers couldn't
remember what the paper said when writing and reviewing the abstract. Trival
errors, yes. Errors of the same magnitude of the supposed impairments reported
in the study- hard to say since the paper is silent  about the magnitude of
the impairments. I'm trying to interpret the table on the regression equations
but need some additional information not in the paper.

I'll comment more on the paper after I have completed checking some more
details.

Rick Doblin

------------------
MAPS-Forum@xxxxxxxx, a member service of the Multidisciplinary Association
for Psychedelic Studies (to become a member, see www.maps.org/memsub.html).
To [un]subscribe, email the message text,
[un]subscribe maps-forum youraddress to majordomo@xxxxxxxx